tattuchu wrote:Forty-Two: "That's one of the things that's encouraging about Trump having been elected. He did so despite the opposition of the assholes on both sides of the traditional political divide."

I'm a little confused. How does opposing Trump make a person an asshole? Only a colossal FUCKWIT would support, vote for, or defend in any way the complete failure that is Trump. This should be obvious to anyone with even the merest hint, the slightest shred, of intelligence or rationality. To think that ANYONE, EVER, could support such a cretinous and so-utterly-and-completely feckless and feculent piece of steaming shit simply beggars belief.

:clap:

Sent from my penis using wankertalk."The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007. "Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that.."Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt. "You know you blokes didn't criticize Obama. You're lying. - Forty Two. Umm - viewtopic.php?f=22&t=42144

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, on Tuesday unilaterally released over 300 pages documenting an interview the panel conducted in August with the founder of the opposition research firm that commissioned the controversial dossier on President Trump.

In that interview, Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson said the dossier’s author, a former MI6 spy named Christopher Steele, told him that the FBI already had “other intelligence” backing up claims in the dossier when he met with an agent in September.

The document has been a partisan flashpoint in the congressional investigations into Russian interference in the U.S. election, with some Republicans suggesting that the bureau may have used unverified information to launch a baseless investigation into Trump.

Here are five takeaways from Simpson’s ten-hour testimony.

Simpson defends veracity of the dossier

The salacious details included in the dossier have become a partisan flashpoint in the debate over whether Trump officials had improper contacts with Russia.

The dossiers’ supporters have pointed to confirmed details in the dossier — like a meeting that former Trump adviser Carter Page had in Moscow — to argue that it gives credibility to the document as a whole.

Republicans argue that dossier was funded by Democrats and includes wild accusations about sexual impropriety by Trump. The core claims of collusion and corruption have not been borne out by the special investigation at this point, they say.

Simpson was clear about what side of the debate he’s on, describing Steel as a “boy scout” who “delivered quality work in very appropriate ways.”

“This is his specialty,” Simpson said.

But while Simpson described his own opposition research work as dealing with hard facts laid out in public records and court filings, he acknowledged that Steele’s endeavors were more subjective and murky and open to interpretation.

“When you evaluate human intelligence, human reporting, field reporting, source reporting, you know, it’s sort of like when you’re a journalist and you’re trying to figure out who’s telling the truth,” he said. “You don’t really decide who’s telling the truth. You decide whether the person is credible, whether there’s other reasons to believe what they’re saying, whether anything they’ve said factually matches up with something in public record.”

Steele “severed” relationship with FBI after questionable New York Times story: Simpson

According to Simpson, Steele was so concerned by the possibility that a presidential candidate might be “blackmailed” by Russia that he reached out to the FBI of his own accord to share when he knew as “a security issue.”

Steele first met with the bureau in the first week of July 2016. He later met an agent in Rome in the fall, a trip that the bureau reimbursed. The bureau launched its investigation into the Trump campaign in late July.

But according to Simpson, Steele cut off his contact with the bureau after the Times ran a story in the fall alleging that the Trump campaign was not under investigation. The former spy was concerned that “the FBI was being manipulated for political ends by the Trump people and that we didn't really understand what was going on.”

“So he stopped dealing with them,” Simpson said.

Partisan rift on Judiciary Committee widens

A spokesman for Grassley immediately blasted the release of the transcript as “totally confounding,” citing the damage to the ongoing investigation.

“Feinstein’s unilateral decision was made as the committee is still trying to secure testimony from other witnesses, including Jared Kushner,” spokesman Taylor Foy said in a statement. “Her action undermines the integrity of the committee’s oversight work and jeopardizes its ability to secure candid voluntary testimony relating to the independent recollections of future witnesses.”

Feinstein for weeks has been sending out requests for interviews and documents related to the Russia investigation without Grassley’s sign-off and the incident exposes a new low in a deepening partisan rift on the Judiciary panel.

The panel is the latest bout of partisan infighting in one of the several Capitol Hill committees probing Russian interference.

Criminal referral against Steele remains a mystery

Last week, Grassley and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked the Department of Justice to open a criminal investigation into Steele, with Graham accusing the former spy of “shopping this dossier all over the world” while acting as an informant for the FBI.

The referral appears to suggest that Steele may have misled the FBI. It cites a law prohibiting individuals from lying to federal authorities, asking DOJ to probe whether Steele made false statements about “the distribution of claims from the dossier.”

Simpson acknowledged in his testimony that he had Steele brief a small group of reporters on his findings. The briefings took place before the election and after Steele had first reached out to the FBI. He did not provide copies of the memoranda to those journalists.

tattuchu wrote:Forty-Two: "That's one of the things that's encouraging about Trump having been elected. He did so despite the opposition of the assholes on both sides of the traditional political divide."

I'm a little confused. How does opposing Trump make a person an asshole? Only a colossal FUCKWIT would support, vote for, or defend in any way the complete failure that is Trump. This should be obvious to anyone with even the merest hint, the slightest shred, of intelligence or rationality. To think that ANYONE, EVER, could support such a cretinous and so-utterly-and-completely feckless and feculent piece of steaming shit simply beggars belief.

Some people are just susceptible to confident "strong men". That's why you get Christians willing to flock around some preacher who just muscles in a mouths off utter garbage while appealing to their insecurities. They hold their hands up in supplication leaving their pockets unguarded and ripe for fleecing.

I've never understood these cowed, weakling people. You can only feel sorry for them.

tattuchu wrote:Forty-Two: "That's one of the things that's encouraging about Trump having been elected. He did so despite the opposition of the assholes on both sides of the traditional political divide."

I'm a little confused. How does opposing Trump make a person an asshole? Only a colossal FUCKWIT would support, vote for, or defend in any way the complete failure that is Trump. This should be obvious to anyone with even the merest hint, the slightest shred, of intelligence or rationality. To think that ANYONE, EVER, could support such a cretinous and so-utterly-and-completely feckless and feculent piece of steaming shit simply beggars belief.

Opposing Trump does not make a person an asshole, but a lot of assholes on both sides of the aisle opposed him. Jeb Bush. Ted Cruz. Hillary Clinton. Joe Biden, George W Bush, Lindsey Graham, - here's a list of the never-trumpers in the GOP - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_R ... aign,_2016 - that contains a lot of assholes. Not all of them are assholes. But, a lot of them are assholes.

It's like how all thumbs are fingers, but not all fingers are thumbs.

O.k., well, now you're making the claim that all persons who support Trump are colossal fuckwits. That's not accurate, although some very surely are colossal fuckwits. Also, a great many Hillary supporters are and were colossal fuckwits.

I disagree that Trump is a total failure. He's actually doing a fine job. He's got a shot at a deal for the wall in exchange for DACA, he brought through a fabulous tax cut (that the main Democrat complaint is that it was not a big ENOUGH tax cut, lol), he has deregulated like a boss (bringing the federal register to its lowest level in 40 years, and removing 12 regulations for every new one created), he has gotten some movement on North Korea, he's defeated ISIS, etc.

If you ever feel sad, remember that somewhere in the world there is a fat kid dropping his favorite ice cream cone.

You may not get a big fat prize:“We oppose any attempts by the administration to systematically under-withhold income taxes during the 2018 tax year, knowing that in 2019 taxpayers may find they owe taxes when they were expecting a refund,” Sen. Ron Wyden and Rep. Richard Neal, the top Democrats on congressional tax committees, wrote to acting IRS Commissioner David Kautter.

tattuchu wrote:Forty-Two: "That's one of the things that's encouraging about Trump having been elected. He did so despite the opposition of the assholes on both sides of the traditional political divide."

I'm a little confused. How does opposing Trump make a person an asshole? Only a colossal FUCKWIT would support, vote for, or defend in any way the complete failure that is Trump. This should be obvious to anyone with even the merest hint, the slightest shred, of intelligence or rationality. To think that ANYONE, EVER, could support such a cretinous and so-utterly-and-completely feckless and feculent piece of steaming shit simply beggars belief.

Opposing Trump does not make a person an asshole, but a lot of assholes on both sides of the aisle opposed him. Jeb Bush. Ted Cruz. Hillary Clinton. Joe Biden, George W Bush, Lindsey Graham, - here's a list of the never-trumpers in the GOP - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_R ... aign,_2016 - that contains a lot of assholes. Not all of them are assholes. But, a lot of them are assholes.

It's like how all thumbs are fingers, but not all fingers are thumbs.

O.k., well, now you're making the claim that all persons who support Trump are colossal fuckwits. That's not accurate, although some very surely are colossal fuckwits. Also, a great many Hillary supporters are and were colossal fuckwits.

I disagree that Trump is a total failure. He's actually doing a fine job. He's got a shot at a deal for the wall in exchange for DACA,

Building walls is a step backwards. Can't believe anyone can think a wall is a good idea.

he brought through a fabulous tax cut

Which is going to tank your economy.

he has deregulated like a boss (bringing the federal register to its lowest level in 40 years, and removing 12 regulations for every new one created),

Regulations are necessarily bad, are they?

Sent from my penis using wankertalk."The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007. "Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that.."Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt. "You know you blokes didn't criticize Obama. You're lying. - Forty Two. Umm - viewtopic.php?f=22&t=42144

For Trump, it's virtually Pavlovian. Any mention of the Russia investigation immediately elicits the phrase "no collusion." (In a 30-minute interview with The New York Times over the holidays, Trump said the words "no collusion" 16 times.)